Got it.
OK, that makes sense. Obviously I disagree, but at least I understand now what I’m disagreeing with.
…and actually, I guess I DON’T disagree, after a moment’s thought. It’s true to say that increasing gun rights is a boon to gun menufacturers. I don’t agree that’s the reasoning in play, but I can hardly argue that it isn’t one result.
If such a broad test as posited by the OP would be grounds for “piercing the corporate veil” then every corporation would be the legal alter ego of its shareholders and basically eliminate the corporate form.
Certainly when people form a corporation under state law, they will set up their corporations as they see fit with the values and beliefs that they personally hold. If I am an orthodox Jewish person who sells items at just above cost so that people can afford them, why would that change when I form Jtgain, Inc.? By allowing one person corporations and LLCs we have already accepted this fact.
If a lawyer could pierce the veil by pointing out that a one person LLC operates very much like its sole owner and operator then why have such things?
Is selling items just above cost a tenet of Orthodox Judaism?
No, not the RFRA. The legislation requiring HL to purchase health insurance to which they had a religously-founded objection. Am I right in thinking that it had a let-out for explicitly religious employers like dioceses?
I don’t think so, no. That exemption came from implementing regulations from HHS, if I recall correctly.